Let's conclude it, Lin Dan is the best MS baddy player in human history.

If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

First ZJH vs Frost is a much faster game; Second as I said LD and LCW should be too fast for 1985's ZJH to deal with.

But to say players like today's TH, PG or even Persson can beat ZJH, I just have to disagree.

To make things simple let's state the following facts.

1. Today's PG is at least half level down from his 1998-99 level.
2. In 1997, a 32 year old ZJH easily beat Sun Jun in a 7-pt game (so that the difference in stamina would not matter much).
3. Sun Jun and PG are around the same level.

Now, the conclusion of ZJH in his prime vs PG today should be obvious, isn't it?

"Best" is ephemeral in sports

Let's say LD remains WR #1 and win gold in 2012. It can happen.

In 2016 LD won't be WR#1. How do you know LD 2016 can beat WR#1 in 2016? Obviously he can't, otherwise LD will still be WR#1. If someone insists LD will remain WR#1 in 2016, how about 2026? It will be absurd.

Comparing athletes from different era is futile. No time machine exists to let top player of old era to play current best.

Badminton and athletes keep changing and that makes badminton interesting. Personally I'll be disappointed if all top players play the same style in the future.

Yep.
Badminton requires an opponent to play to win. If X doesn't play LD, you can't claim LD is better than X with complete confidence. You can only make a judgment, and judgments are subject to disagreements.

In contrast, field & track or swimming records can be compared w/o opponents to show up. It's objectively verifiable data.

Originally Posted by cooler

yup. that is why TH folded, walkout and avoided LD so many time. LD cant be the best when he can't play TH, right?

Yep.
Badminton requires an opponent to play to win. If X doesn't play LD, you can't claim LD is better than X with complete confidence. You can only make a judgment, and judgments are subject to disagreements.

In contrast, field & track or swimming records can be compared w/o opponents to show up. It's objectively verifiable data.

In 2016 LD won't be WR#1. How do you know LD 2016 can beat WR#1 in 2016? Obviously he can't, otherwise LD will still be WR#1. If someone insists LD will remain WR#1 in 2016, how about 2026? It will be absurd.

Comparing athletes from different era is futile. No time machine exists to let top player of old era to play current best.

Badminton and athletes keep changing and that makes badminton interesting. Personally I'll be disappointed if all top players play the same style in the future.

Did you read my post? I have said many times that I have no objection to the claim that LD/LCW can beat ZJH, what I cannot agree with is your claim that players like today's PG, TH or even Joachim Persson can beat ZJH in his prime.

Lin Dan might be the best player 2006-2009... Taufik was argueably better than him before that [2004-2005]... but he is surely not the most famous! The most famous is: ...PRAKASH PADUKONE! Because he is the father of Deepika Padukone! Just google her if you don't trust me... She has 1 billion fans!

it is very easy to judge who is greatest player of all time. is just by based on no.of titles, dominance among peers. for that nobody is equal to Lin Dan. GREATEST MS PLAYER OF ALL TIME 1) LIN DAN 2) YANG YANG 3) ZHAO JIANHUA GREATEST CHINA MS PLAYER OF ALL TIME 1) LIN DAN 2) YANG YANG 3) ZHAO JIANHUA GREATEST INDON MS PLAYER OF ALL TIME 1) RUDY HARTONO 2) TAUFIK HIDAYAT 3) LIM SWIE KING GREATEST MALAYSIA MS PLAYER OF ALL TIME 1) LEE CHONG WEI 2) RASHID SIDEK 3) MISBUN SIDEK

LD lost to LCW

LD just lost to LCW 21-16 21-16 in Swiss Open. As I said before, 'best' in sports is temporary.

Someone can insist the best still loses sometimes. Then what's the difference between 'best' and 'not best', if they lose? The so-called 'best' is time average, or sample a particular time scale. On a match by match basis, the 'best' can still lose on any particular day, and is not the best on that day.

Arguing a particular sampling period (e.g. 1 year) is superior to another (1 day) would be purely empirical.
Saying LCW is the best MS baddy player today would be less controversial, isn't it?